Let's talk impeachment.

[hiaasenrocks]

A recent poll shows 55% of the American people believe that the Bush Administration misled the country into war.

In another poll (seen on one of the Sunday talk shows today) roughly the same percentage of Americans say they would like to see the Democrats win back the Congress in 2006. (I think winning the House is well within reach.)

The Democratic leadership showed us last week that they are ready to force the issue of whether the Bush Administration misused pre-war intelligence.

Considering all that, how likely do you think it is that, if we take back the House, we will see impeachment proceedings begin. I'm talking likelihood here, not whether or not we want it to happen, because I think most of us here want it.

I think the chance is pretty good, probably better than 75%.

Thoughts?

[ClassWarrior]

1. If Bush** had any dignity at all, he'd resign now...

...and spare the nation the shame.

If he refuses, we have no choice but to IMPEACH him. :shrug:

NGU.

[Jade Fox]

2. It will happen, and it will be a good thing.

Bush is not exactly the sort of guy who snatches victory from the jaws
of defeat. He's the sort who, in the face of any real adversity, collapses.
He will not recover.

My only question is: (revealing my ignorance) with Cheney effectively out,
who is the next in line?

[ClassWarrior]

4. Nancy Pelosi.

(Because we need to win back the House in 2006 to even get this going. And I'm doing my damnedest to make sure that happens.)

NGU.

[cassiepriam]

7. President Pelosi. Has a nice ring doesn't it?

[Jade Fox]

10. Okay, but if it happens before election 2006......

which believe I will, after Cheney comes Frist, no? But Frist is in trouble
too, so who comes after him?

[ClassWarrior]

11. It'll NEVER happen before Dem Victory 2006.

But if for some reason the chain of command had to kick in now, I believe Cyrano has it right, below: Cheney, Hastert, Lott, Rice, etc...

NGU.

[Jade Fox]

15. The reason I believe it will happen before 2006....

is that I believe the move to impeach will actually be lead by Republicans
who have have reached the conclusion they must turn on Bush to retain
any credibility for themselves and their party, and to distract from their
former idiot allegiance to him.

We'll see.

[ClassWarrior]

16. That would be a wonderful problem to have.

NGU.

[hiaasenrocks]

24. That would be nice. However...

I think Bush's credibility problem is less of a threat to them than losing party support would be. And that's what would happen if any Republican were to start talking openly about impeachment. I guess, in my opinion, the question is, Who would be the first one to say it? That would take a brave soul. Then, I guess, we might see the floodgates open. Who knows. Interesting to think about.

[calimary]

25. Yes, we'll see. But stranger things have happened. Like with Nixon.

YES it was true that OUR SIDE controlled things in the Congress. BUT, it would have been sheer agony to try to pursue IMPEACHMENT without the help and concurrence of the Republicans, even while they were the minority party then. It wasn't until Barry Goldwater and a handful of others went to Nixon, personally, and told him he'd lost the support of his party - meaning they wouldn't be there for him if push came to IMPEACHMENT in the House. THAT was the straw the broke the camel's back. If conditions remain this poor, and they have NOT regained momentum (which is mighty hard to do at this point, with so many continuing downturns and republi-CONS starting to get irritable sphincter muscles about it). We just have to do our part to make sure things stay hostile toward them. Sure, a lot can happen between now and the next midterms. But the trend so far is not favorable.

[struggle4progress]

26. For that to work, we need lots of "R = W" noise right now

to force Rs to put really visible daylight between themselves and Commander AWOL

[Jade Fox]

27. Excellent point. n/t

[sandyd921]

29. Order of succession is

VP, then house majority leader, then president pro tempore of the Senate.

I just love the sound of President Pelosi :loveya: I'm starting to be a believer. It's just possible. Please, please make it so!

[Cyrano]

3. Okay, so if Bush is impeached, then we have Cheney.

And if Cheney is impeached, then we have the speaker of the house, Dennis Hastert.

And if Hastert is impeached, then we have the president pro-tem of the senate -- I think it's currently Trent Lott, but that changes periodically.

And if the president pro-tem of the senate is impeached, then we have the secretary of state -- Condi.

When being governed by a totally criminal cabal, impeaching whoever happens to be at the top at the time is almost useless.

[ClassWarrior]

5. Wrong. See #3 above.

NGU.

[Cyrano]

13. From your post to God's In-Box.

I'd love to see it happen, but remember what happened when Nixon resigned. He got to appoint Gerald Ford as VP before he left office.

Then Gerald Ford appointed Nelson Rockefeller as his VP.

Do you really believe that corporate America is going to give up without a fight? Not to mention the Diebold and ES&S touch-screen voting machines that make it questionable whether we'll ever again get a fair voting system in this country.

[ClassWarrior]

14. Do you really believe that WE'RE going to give up without a fight too?

They stole our nation from us.

Never Give Up.

[cassiepriam]

6. The chain of command is pathetic isn't it?

[ClassWarrior]

9. I guess, as usual, it's up to us. We need to win back the House...

...and Senate next year. You ready to help? This is a bigger opportunity than 2004. Me? I'm gonna help defeat Sensenbrenner. Won't that be sweet?...

NGU.

[mcscajun]

12. Not Lott -- Stevens.

Here's the current Top Five:

Vice President (Richard B. Cheney)
Speaker of the House of Representatives (J. Dennis Hastert)
President pro tempore of the Senate (Ted Stevens)
Secretary of State (Condoleezza Rice)
Secretary of the Treasury (John W. Snow)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_line_of_succession

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

18. Isn't Stevens the "Bridge to Nowhere Guy? nt.

[Blue_In_AK]

20. The one and only and he's about 150 years old.

I expect him to keel over dead one of these days when he goes off on one of his tirades in the Senate. One can always hope.

[oldtime dfl_er]

8. Open note to anyone contemplating a run for the House in 2006:

If you talk IMPEACHMENT you've got my vote!

http://www.cafepress.com/scarebaby/658010

[Steely_Dan]

30. Fuera?

What does that mean. I saw it in protests in So. America. Slow on the uptake.

-Paige

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

17. There is open talk of impeachment on the MSM

I almost fell out of my chair while watching McLaughlin today. Elinor Clift brought it up and said misleading a country into a war of choice is an impeachable offense. She was not shouted down or disagreed with. Even the conservatives on the show were saying harsh things about the administration. I think the genie is out of the bottle.

There has never been such an overwhelming shitstorm for any White House and I am including the Nixon White House when I say that. They had just one huge scandal while right now this administration is trying to deal with: Plamegate, DSM, Abramhoff, Delay, Frist, Libby indictments, the constant embarrassment of Rove, massive protests in S. America, Abu Garaib, Torture, Bolton, the War itself, Femagate, pissed off hurricane victims, and who knows what I am leaving out. I think there is some video game where little prairie dogs keep jumping out of holes and that's what is happening to them.

The Republicans are imploding. And now they are cutting student aid and Medicare - I am wondering if they are suicidal.

But, the Democrats have to come clean on the war. I do believe there is culpability about voting to authorize the war. I think they have to acknowledge that they acted not out of their best instincts. They were cowed and afraid to appear "unpatriotic" . Someone has to just go ahead and say it and say that we have all learned a valuable lesson from all of this and we will emerge as a smarter, better , stronger country because of it. Ronald Reagan was able to put Iran-Contra behind him when he had to guts to acknowledge error on his part.

[ClassWarrior]

19. That's awesome. I'm sure those words didn't come easily from the...

...lips of a Corporate Media shill like Clift.

But pleaaasseeee... don't call them the "MSM." There's nothing remotely "mainstream" about their sick two-headed agenda of greed and manipulation. Please call them what they are, the Corporate Media.

NGU.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

21. Eleanor Clift has down a stalwart job in my opinion for a long long

time on the McLaughlin show credibly representing liberal and Democratic viewpoints.

[ClassWarrior]

22. All things are relative.

Next to the around-the-bend-loony McLaughlin panel, I can see how she looks that way.

NGU.

[hiaasenrocks]

23. I saw that, too. Her comments came just as I was

thinking about the probability of Bush being impeached over the war and other issues linked to it. When she said it, my eyebrows went up and when no one objected, I was even more surprised. Usually you'd expect to hear one of the right-wingers say, "What are you talking about!" or something to that effect. Nothing was said in rebuttal. I think they know it's a very good possibility.

That part of the show is what prompted my post.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

28. It's the first time I've heard it spoken of seriously

and I'm glad it prompted you to make your post. I love that the "I" word is offically on the table.

I have to say that I really enjoy McLaughlin Group and always have. They have different political viewpoints, but they have actual conversations and disagree with one another civilly. I love eccentric, irascible ringmaster McLaughlin who seems to have perfected the art of self-parody. It's my favorite talking head show.

[Independent_Liberal]

31. Speaking of impeachment...

...the new Impeach PAC website is now online. Just thought I'd post the link in case anybody hasn't seen it yet.

www.impeachpac.com